Participant observation is a term for a main form of knowing used in ethnographies.

By becoming a participant in a culture, an ethnographer seeks to obtain an insider perspective. It is this perspective that separates participant observation from other forms of similarly minded research. Obtaining the perspective of a participant in a culture is one necessary part of an honest look into that culture. Many aspects of a culture build on other aspects of that culture, and in order to understand the interrelations, one must understand how to participate in the culture. Perhaps more importantly, some cultures will attempt to hide aspects of their culture from those who are not participants. In Sterks work, she expresses the diculties of gaining access to the prostitution community in the rst place saying, the main lesson I learned in these early eorts was the importance of having some knowledge of the lives of the people I wanted to study, while at the same time refraining from presenting myself as an expert. I believe this sentiment is the heart of what makes participant observation eective. Yet, it is this very idea of participating that sets participant observation aside from most other forms of research. While most forms of research involving culture will ask questions of, or talk to people from that culture, participant observation involves a deeper connection. Instead of a survey, or an interview, participant observers often live within the culture, and grow to become part of it. Of course, in order for participant observation to remain a type of research, the observer must remain an outsider as well. By keeping an anthropologists perspective, a participant observer can combine the insider experience with anthropologies methods to analyze cultures, and compare them. We see such a comparison drawn from the eld work of Boas in Tapestry of culture between the two types of weddings. There are dangers to participant observation as well as benets. By becoming a participant, an anthropologist becomes bound by the boundaries of culture. They may miss perspectives that could be gained by being part of a dierent culture, or have their actions constrained by the rules of culture. In Nicer Girls Dont Talk To Rastas, Johanna does not adhere to cultural boundaries by interacting with a dierent culture, the Rastas. She is reproached for her actions, and eventually the town, and even her host family, want nothing further to do with her. Gmelech tells this story as an insight into the importance of not homogenizing communities, but I feel that this story also highlights the way that culture restricts anthropologists. The authors of the book would also have me mention the ways anthropologists benet their host cultures. However, I feel that if done correctly, participant observation should not devolve into use-repayment terminology. By participating in a culture and living that culture, one does their part when they can. Ignoring needs of the culture is as unreasonable as a participant observer as it is as a natural member. The main dierence between a participant observer and a natural member of a culture, is that a participant observer is capable of translating worrds and actions between the two cultures. A participant observer struggles to become a full participant in culture, while retaining previous cultural identity. Because the participant observers interaction with culture is reciprocal, the participant observer can nd out hidden, or unverbalized aspects of a culture. By remaining an outsider, they can view all of this information against the backdrop of their own culture, or other cultures. All of these together, dierentiate participant observation from other forms of research.